The Kamiokande project, and the Super-Kamiokande project has been built looking for proton decay and the Hyper-Kamiokande project will be built to improve the resolution of proton decay detection
axil : And what did they report??: The bar of stabilty for the proton can be raised higher... => no decay so far...
This is the silliest argument I even heard here. Mainstream physics keeps many such a similar billion projects - failed indeed. At any case, the decay of proton cannot serve as a source of heat for LENR from multiple reasons. You're just collecting all esoteric stuff which you don't understand and promoting it as a theory of cold fusion.
I am just following the research and the theory of that research from Holmlid. Time will tell if that faith in Holmlids research will hold true, I know that faith is more based on science than is that of you or Mills.
Time will tell if that faith in Holmlids research will hold true
axil: Stop becoming depressive: I believe Holmlid does great work, albeit many seem to hate hime. Everybody that does CERN Physics on a desktop is a danger for the establishment. I'm sure he/his ideas will have some success.
Nobody believes in Mills. We believe, that at this very moment parts of his theory deliver better answers than old stuff. Nothing more. Theory(ies) is (are) a way to think about problems and as soon as they can help to understand it, they become mainstream until a new even better one shines up.
axil: Stop becoming depressive: I believe Holmlid does great work, albeit many seem to hate hime. Everybody that does CERN Physics on a desktop is a danger for the establishment. I'm sure he/his ideas will have some success.
https://newenergytreasure.com/…s-should-check-for-muons/
Hot Fusion Professor Says LENR Scientists Should Check For Muons
QuoteOur studies are not part of LENR. The temperature we observe in the laser-induced plasma is 50 – 500 MK (mega Kelvin), thus much higher than in the Sun. On the other hand, the spontaneous process giving muons that we describe in one publication may be a basic process in LENR. LENR scientists need to check if they have muons in their systems.
QuoteI believe Holmlid does great work, albeit many seem to hate hime
I don't hate neither Holmlid, neither Mills. And I don't even think, prof. Holmlid does wrong work - it's just Axill, who misinterprets his own proclamation systematically on behalf of his ad-hoced (and mostly confused) speculations. Prof. Holmlid is quite realistic about his research with compare to Axil and he doesn't pretend, he develops cold fusion.
The Standard model (SM) has predictions that have not been realized. Since matter in the universe exists, conservation of Baryon number(B) and lepton number(L) must not have applies at some point in the evolution of the universe. If B and L were always conserved, than matter and antimatter would have canceled themselves out into energy thereby destroying all matter in the universe. But in the latest epoch of the universe, these two conservation laws seem to apply absolutely. The conclusion is that something is wrong with the SM and the universe in general.
There are two main interpretations for this disparity: either the universe began with a small preference for matter (total baryonic number of the universe different from zero), or the universe was originally perfectly symmetric, but somehow a set of phenomena contributed to a small imbalance in favour of matter over time. The second point of view is preferred, although there is no clear experimental evidence indicating either of them to be the correct one.
GUT Baryogenesis under Sakharov conditions
In 1967, Andrei Sakharov proposed a set of three necessary conditions that a baryon-generating interaction must satisfy to produce matter and antimatter at different rates. These conditions were inspired by the recent discoveries of the cosmic background radiation and CP-violation in the neutral kaon system. The three necessary "Sakharov conditions" are:
• Baryon number B violation.
• C-symmetry and CP-symmetry violation.
• Interactions out of thermal equilibrium.
Baryon number violation is obviously a necessary condition to produce an excess of baryons over anti-baryons. But C-symmetry violation is also needed so that the interactions which produce more baryons than anti-baryons will not be counterbalanced by interactions which produce more anti-baryons than baryons. CP-symmetry violation is similarly required because otherwise equal numbers of left-handed baryons and right-handed anti-baryons would be produced, as well as equal numbers of left-handed anti-baryons and right-handed baryons. Finally, the interactions must be out of thermal equilibrium, since otherwise CPT symmetry would assure compensation between processes increasing and decreasing the baryon number.
There is a condition where CPT symmetry can be violated so that B and L conservation is violates. These are called the electroweak sphaleron anomaly at high energies and temperatures.
A sphaleron is similar to the midpoint of the instanton, so it is non-perturbative. An instanton is a tangling of force lines that resolve into a creation of a pseudoparticle. This means that under normal conditions sphalerons are unobservably rare. However, they would have been more common when unusual conditions appear in the forces that existed during matter formation in the early universe.
Such instantons have appeared during the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect where a magnetic field creates two fractionally charged pseudoparticles.
To simplify things, there are conditions where a magnetic field can get tangled up inside a proton where instantons form so that it decays into kaons.
I produced a post to explain how this happens here.
QuoteSome esoteric process is causing the proton to decay in LENR. This process is the root source for the production of energy and sub atomic particles in LENR.
The proton doesn't decay during LENR and some LENR's have their energy source identified already (i.e. Lipinski fusion of deuterons on molten lithium) - so we can be perfectly sure, that the proton decay isn't "root source for the production of energy and sub atomic particles in LENR". But you cannot beat the human stupidity.
The proton doesn't decay during LENR and some LENR's have their energy source identified already (i.e. Lipinski fusion of deuterons on molten lithium) - so we can be perfectly sure, that the proton decay isn't "root source for the production of energy and sub atomic particles in LENR". But you cannot beat the human stupidity.
The fusion reaction is catalyzed by muons. Its proton decay that produces the muons.
I try to ignore stupidity, after all it's only human.
The fusion reaction is catalyzed by muons. Its proton decay that produces the muons.
axil: This sentence is incomplete - what fusion reaction? - and awfully wrong. LiH* fusion is not catalyzed by muons.
Further on: Muons are a resonance of electrons (see Mills). Thus muonic resonances could play a role in the overall process. But definitely not a free muon!
QuoteThe fusion reaction is catalyzed by muons. Its proton decay that produces the muons.
Fusion maybe, but not cold fusion, typical cold fusion the less. Muons are produced with decay of positive pions.
axil: This sentence is incomplete - what fusion reaction? - and awfully wrong. LiH* fusion is not catalyzed by muons.
Muons are responsible for any fusion reaction that is produced in LENR.
Further on: Muons are a resonance of electrons (see Mills). Thus muonic resonances could play a role in the overall process. But definitely not a free muon!
According to the standard model of particle physics, a muon is a fundamental particle: a lepton.
Quotehttps://www.nature.com/articles/srep16184
Topological, non-topological and instanton droplets driven by spin-transfer torque in materials with perpendicular magnetic anisotropy and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interaction
This article explains how a unbalanced magnetic field can produce an instanton.
According to the standard model of particle physics, a muon is a fundamental particle: a lepton.
axil : Indeed it is flying free - independently, but physically it's a resonance of an electron an thus not a fundamental particle.
==> Standard model is wrong or needs some fine-tuning. Mills model can explain why there are only three Leptons! Ask once the standard model the same question!
axil : Indeed it is flying free - independently, but physically it's a resonance of an electron an thus not a fundamental particle.
==> Standard model is wrong or needs some fine-tuning. Mills model can explain why there are only three Leptons! Ask once the standard model the same question!
If the electron accumulated the energy that the rest mass of the muon has, that electron would be massless and able to travel at light speed. Such an electron is called a dirac electron.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_equation
When it comes to sources in particle physics theory, i will go with Dirac rather than Mills.
The concept of rest mass touches the Higgs theory of mass. I suspect that Mills has some hand waving in subverting the Higgs field.
The concept of rest mass touches the Higgs theory of mass. I suspect that Mills has some hand waving in subverting the Higgs field.
The Higgs particle is the last cry of a dying field...
The Higgs particle is the last cry of a dying field...
Particle physics will gain a new life from the appreciation of the work of Holmlid (and NOT Mills). It's just a matter of time.
This is the silliest argument I even heard here. Mainstream physics keeps many such a similar billion projects - failed indeed. At any case, the decay of proton cannot serve as a source of heat for LENR from multiple reasons. You're just collecting all esoteric stuff which you don't understand and promoting it as a theory of cold fusion.
And I must say 'he should know'
Zephyr,
Been going on for years, no reason for it
to stop now.
Leonid Urutskoev on the 25th Sochi CNT&BL Presentation blog
